Double standard?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 105
Double standard?
The latest PR campaign is that a few bad TSA employees do not represent the TSA, yet "a few bad apples" does require a one size fits all screening of the traveling public?
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.
#4




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney (for now), GVA (only in my memories)
Programs: QF Lifetime Silver (big whoop)
Posts: 9,287
The latest PR campaign is that a few bad TSA employees do not represent the TSA, yet "a few bad apples" does require a one size fits all screening of the traveling public?
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.
It's 11 years too late, now, but I wish someone on 9/13/01 had said that "the actions of the 9/11 terrorists in no way reflect on the vast majority of the traveling public" and that we "have a zero-tolerance policy for such actions" and that anyone found using an aircraft as a weapon in the future would be "reprimanded and, if necessary, retrained."

Agree with you about precheck, too; it's just a bauble to (attempt to) distract TSA's loudest opponents.
#5




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 6,596
Which part of PC do you find an invasion of privacy?
Do I win a lollipop?
#6




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: RDU
Posts: 8,343
The latest PR campaign is that a few bad TSA employees do not represent the TSA, yet "a few bad apples" does require a one size fits all screening of the traveling public?
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.
Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.

(you're pretty much preaching to the choir)
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,253
So, to make it simple. If you believe that any question is too personal in that it invades your privacy, you make the simple choice of not answwering it and not proceeding with PC. Again, how is it an invasion or your privacy to be asked a question which you chose to have been asked and then choose to answer?
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
So, to make it simple. If you believe that any question is too personal in that it invades your privacy, you make the simple choice of not answwering it and not proceeding with PC. Again, how is it an invasion or your privacy to be asked a question which you chose to have been asked and then choose to answer?
I haven't done anything that merits treating me like a criminal simply because I want to get on a plane. Screen me simply, quickly, and effectively. If I alarm on something, by all means resolve it. However, TSA isn't entitled to know more about me than I'm not carrying anything at the time that will harm a plane. No one should have to open their lives to that degree to avoid harassment.
I don't have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean that what I'm doing, where I'm going, and who I'm seeing for how how long is any of the government's damn business either. @:-) Their only business is answering the question of if I have any WEI that could harm a plane. No? Then have a nice flight.
It's not a hard concept, but unfortunately, our government has lost sight of the constitution and respecting the privacy of a free people.
If they think I'm a threat, then build a case against me, arrest me, and get me before a judge. If they can't do that, then leave me the hell alone.
#9
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston
Programs: CO Platinum
Posts: 283
It's an invasion that people have to give the government tons of personal information that it's not entitled to just for a chance to not get harassed by government when flying - something we took for granted 11 years ago.
I haven't done anything that merits treating me like a criminal simply because I want to get on a plane. Screen me simply, quickly, and effectively. If I alarm on something, by all means resolve it. However, TSA isn't entitled to know more about me than I'm not carrying anything at the time that will harm a plane. No one should have to open their lives to that degree to avoid harassment.
I don't have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean that what I'm doing, where I'm going, and who I'm seeing for how how long is any of the government's damn business either. @:-) Their only business is answering the question of if I have any WEI that could harm a plane. No? Then have a nice flight.
It's not a hard concept, but unfortunately, our government has lost sight of the constitution and respecting the privacy of a free people.
If they think I'm a threat, then build a case against me, arrest me, and get me before a judge. If they can't do that, then leave me the hell alone.
I haven't done anything that merits treating me like a criminal simply because I want to get on a plane. Screen me simply, quickly, and effectively. If I alarm on something, by all means resolve it. However, TSA isn't entitled to know more about me than I'm not carrying anything at the time that will harm a plane. No one should have to open their lives to that degree to avoid harassment.
I don't have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean that what I'm doing, where I'm going, and who I'm seeing for how how long is any of the government's damn business either. @:-) Their only business is answering the question of if I have any WEI that could harm a plane. No? Then have a nice flight.
It's not a hard concept, but unfortunately, our government has lost sight of the constitution and respecting the privacy of a free people.
If they think I'm a threat, then build a case against me, arrest me, and get me before a judge. If they can't do that, then leave me the hell alone.
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 105
So, to make it simple. If you believe that any question is too personal in that it invades your privacy, you make the simple choice of not answwering it and not proceeding with PC. Again, how is it an invasion or your privacy to be asked a question which you chose to have been asked and then choose to answer?
I take it that you are operating on the assumption that the "interview" is end all of discussion and review for a persons authorization for precheck?
From TSA website:
Q. What will TSA do as part of the pre-screening of participants?
A. For security reasons, TSA cannot provide specifics about screening procedures. Volunteered participant information is used to make an intelligence-driven risk assessment that could allow some travelers to qualify for expedited screening.
.................................................. .....
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 105
This is from a paper written in 2003 from Reason Foundation, I do not know how applicable it is today, but it gives insight into TSA workings
A RISK-BASED AIRPORT SECURITY POLICY
By Robert W. Poole, Jr. with George Passantino
Project Director: Robert W. Poole, Jr.
"For the risk-screening function, TSAs proposed CAPPS-II would create a massive, intrusive database on the personal and financial details of air travelers. This is far more than required for the task of identifying highrisk
travelers for enhanced scrutiny at airports."
A RISK-BASED AIRPORT SECURITY POLICY
By Robert W. Poole, Jr. with George Passantino
Project Director: Robert W. Poole, Jr.
"For the risk-screening function, TSAs proposed CAPPS-II would create a massive, intrusive database on the personal and financial details of air travelers. This is far more than required for the task of identifying highrisk
travelers for enhanced scrutiny at airports."

